Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-41041-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240126171546.1233172-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
 <20240126171546.1233172-18-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org> <CAPLW+4nL6D7R88Q_kJjAT-bWTFBk8a=FT0vL+fyRgxaDeSyhNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <b5ecacaa-8ccc-4588-b3be-4b5f85813909@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <b5ecacaa-8ccc-4588-b3be-4b5f85813909@linaro.org>
From: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 21:38:31 -0600
Message-ID: <CAPLW+4nN--gG9XsOu6a-mo5vcM-GycRrhPQFOtNidfVTM=KonQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 17/17] spi: s3c64xx: use bitfield access macros
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Cc: broonie@kernel.org, andi.shyti@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org, 
	alim.akhtar@samsung.com, jassi.brar@samsung.com, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andre.draszik@linaro.org, 
	peter.griffin@linaro.org, kernel-team@android.com, willmcvicker@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 9:23=E2=80=AFPM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro=
org> wrote:
>
> Hi, Sam,
>
> Thanks for the review feedback!
>
> On 1/26/24 20:12, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> >> -               val |=3D S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_HALFWORD;
> >> -               val |=3D S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_HALFWORD;
> >> +               val |=3D FIELD_PREP(S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_MASK,
> >> +                                 S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_HALFWORD) |
> >> +                      FIELD_PREP(S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_MASK,
> >> +                                 S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_HALFWORD);
> > Two people complained it makes the code harder to read. Yet it's not
> > addressed in v3. Please see my comments for your previous submission
> > explaining what can be done, and also Andi's comment on that matter.
>
> I kept these intentionally. Please read my reply on that matter or the
> cover letter to this patch set.
>

I read it. But still don't like it :) I'm sure it's possible to do
this modification, but at the same time keep the code clean an easy to
read. The code above -- I don't like at all, sorry. It was much better
before this patch, IMHO.

> > Also I think new patch series are being submitted a bit too fast,
> > people might not have enough time to provide the review.
>
> This patch set contains patches that are already reviewed or too simple
> to being lagged.
>

Ok, agreed.

> Cheers,
> ta